mcsven wrote:Bah, don't waste my time with obvious nonsense.
you could spend your time with answering what im asking you instead of just saying that im wrong
mcsven wrote:Notwithstanding the fact that you know nothing of the state of the codebase, of course reducing features shortens development time. Besides, this is not about feasibility, about which only Josh is informed, it's about hard choices.
then explain me how your cuts woundt open up more questions than they answer?
you just gone "your are spouting bullshit" without answering any questions that should be easy to answer if they are "obvious"
also im not talking about code in all but one point, but im talking about game design.
how would you close the gaps that you open up with your cuts and still have a reduction in total time needed?
mcsven wrote:So, for the third time: what are you willing to cut?
none of the things you proposed because they would all break the game
except maybe the limited universe thing, but that would either be no change in development time at all or would necessitate rewriting the universe sim afterwards to enable the infinite universe.
mcsven wrote:Fleet management [...] Multiple ship ownership
how would the universe work then, game design wise?
the Full NPC's are too much to handle in large amounts, so we have to include subordination of lesser AI to greater AI to populate the universe with something.
mcsven wrote:Research and development
PCG ships and weapons that are routinely updated in-game
aha, contradiction much?
where to seed the updated equipment to?
who produces it at the beginning?
how does it go from being only available at a single point to being ubiquitous and "normal" like the old equipment?
by answering that questions you are right back at things that are only a spit away from a market and R&D sim, so nothing gained there.
also: what Ninjasawer said